Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 27 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Fidelity Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. De La Cuesta.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fidelity Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. De La Cuesta Anchor | green | “federal regulations have no less preemptive effect than federal statutes.” | 17 |
| 2 | Frank C. Fetterusso, Otto Hofendiener, and Leonard Giardiana v. State of New York, New York State Office of Mental Health | green | “cramped reading of 407 california urges would enable the state to obtain social security benefits through procedures that afford less protection than judicial process affords.” | 4 |
| 3 | Alfred Crawford Daniel Carrasco Jerry Parker v. Russell S. Gould William Mayer, (Two Cases) | green | “are exempt from legal process and cannot be used to pay the plaintiffs cost of care without the patient's knowing, affirmative and unequivocal consent.” | 3 |
| 4 | Nelson v. Heiss | green | “shall be exempt from the claim of creditors, and shall not be liable to attachment, levy, or seizure by or under any legal or equitable process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.